ML20058K319
| ML20058K319 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 07/13/1993 |
| From: | Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Gipson D DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NOED-93-3-002, NOED-93-3-2, NUDOCS 9312150138 | |
| Download: ML20058K319 (2) | |
Text
,
a p
i l
Mc l
UNITED STATES
[
k NUCLEAR nEGULATORY COMMisslON j
y arciou ni i
5 f
j cLEN ELLYN, ILUNOt$ 60137 1
JUL 131993 Docket No. 50-341 License No. NPF-43 N0ED No. 93-3-002 The Detroit Edison Company ATIN:
D. R. Gipson Senior Vice President Nuclear Generation 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 i
Dear Mr. Gipson:
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF ENFORCEMENT DISCRETION By letter dated July 9,1993, you requested the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to exercise its discretion not to enforce compliance with the required actions in Technical Specification 3.7.2.b.l.
Your staff informed the NRC on July 9,1993, at 11 a.m. (EDT) that the Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant would be required to be shutdown within six hours after opening the Control Center heating ventilation and air conditioning (CCHVAC) common suction plenum to perform repairs on the division two supply fan, and that there was a need for enforcement discretion to prevent challenging the operating staff and plant equipment with a shutdown and subsequent restart.
As justification for continued operation, you provided reasonable assurances that this maintenance evolution could be accomplished within a short duration and that compensatory actions to restore the CCHVAC system to an operable condition within 30 minutes of a need for its operation were in place.
Additionally, given those compensatory actions, your analyses had concluded that the design requirement to ensure control room doses remained below those specified in General Design Criteria 19 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 would still be met.
Based on our review of your justification for continued operation, including the compensatory measures identified above, we have concluded that this course of action involves minimal or no safety impact, and we are clearly satisfied that this exercise of enforcement discretion is warranted from a public health and safety perspective.
Therefore, this letter documents our verbal granting on July 9, 1993, of our intention to exercise discretion not to enforce compliance with Technical Specification 3.7.2.b.1 for the period from July 9, 1993, at 5:45 p.m. (EDT), when the original six hours would have expired, until July 10, 1993, at 2:15 a.m. (EDT).
090040 yatassoias 9aon 3 OI '
ADOCK0500g1 PDR P
T fE 4 73 The Detroit Edison Company 2
Subsequent to our verbal granting of enforcement discretion, we understand that the required work to make the division two train of CCHVAC operable was completed at 2:59 p.m. on July 9,1993, within the time constraints of the Technical Specification action statement, thus eliminating the need to exercise enforcement discretion. These efforts reflect positively as you completed the repair work in a timely manner commensurate with its importance to safety.
Sincerely, Yf&:v l"
~
John B. Martin, [
Regional Administr'ator cc:
John A. Tibai, Supervisor of Compliance P. A. Marquardt, Corporate Legal Department OC/LFDCB PDR LPDR Resident Inspector, RIII James R. Padgett, Michigan Public Service Commission Michigan Department of Public Health Monroe County Office of Civil Preparedness J. G. Partlow, ADPR/f4RR W. T. Russell, ADT/f4RR J. W. Roe, DRPW/f4RR J. A. Zwolinski, ADR3/f4RR T. G. Colburn, LPM /NRR J. Lieberman, OE Technical Assistant, Division of Reactor Projects - I/II, f4RR 4